They were used for clearing fortifications and to deal with armour. Although more modern munitions kinda put a stop to 'em.
How'd they stop tanks?DeathsHands said:They were used for clearing fortifications and to deal with armour. Although more modern munitions kinda put a stop to 'em.
Oh... I guess I misunderstood... because in modern day "Armor" implies tanks or APCs/IFVs.dathwampeer said:He didn't say tanks. He said fortifications and armour. Not sure what he meant by armour but I doubt it was tanks.firedfns13 said:How'd they stop tanks?DeathsHands said:They were used for clearing fortifications and to deal with armour. Although more modern munitions kinda put a stop to 'em.
Wouldn't a tank just roll straight through the flames and run the guy over?
Molotov cocktails were originally designed as anti-tank weapons. I assume that the heat from the flames could destroy the engine or other finnicky systems, or flames and smoke kill the occupants.firedfns13 said:How'd they stop tanks?DeathsHands said:They were used for clearing fortifications and to deal with armour. Although more modern munitions kinda put a stop to 'em.
Wouldn't a tank just roll straight through the flames and run the guy over?
Fire sucks the air out of the tank.Blue_vision said:Molotov cocktails were originally designed as anti-tank weapons. I assume that the heat from the flames could destroy the engine or other finnicky systems, or flames and smoke kill the occupants.firedfns13 said:How'd they stop tanks?DeathsHands said:They were used for clearing fortifications and to deal with armour. Although more modern munitions kinda put a stop to 'em.
Wouldn't a tank just roll straight through the flames and run the guy over?
Actually in WW2, it was common tactics to use flamethrowers against tanks, since they were a lot slower, less protected and usually had fair sized viewing ports. That, combined with the flamethrower of the time, which used a combination of gasoline and tar, would wash over and coat the entire tank and it's fairly easy to imagine it gushing through all the crevices and holes in a WW2 tank.firedfns13 said:Oh... I guess I misunderstood... because in modern day "Armor" implies tanks or APCs/IFVs.dathwampeer said:He didn't say tanks. He said fortifications and armour. Not sure what he meant by armour but I doubt it was tanks.firedfns13 said:How'd they stop tanks?DeathsHands said:They were used for clearing fortifications and to deal with armour. Although more modern munitions kinda put a stop to 'em.
Wouldn't a tank just roll straight through the flames and run the guy over?
I'm still waiting for a good flamethrower in a game ^^TheTaco007 said:It's not quite as effective nowadays, but it used to be for clearing bunkers and trenches and things. Nowadays I'd only use it just cause fire is awesome.
Unless you can ambush and proceed to get five kills without dying over a span of 3 minutes. This may be the most mediocre brag ever but I'm proud of it. So fuck you.Blue_vision said:...Unless you're playing TF2, in which you don't use flamethrowers because it'll cause you too much pain.Skeleton Jelly said:Exactly. Apart from all the other ideas mentioned, scare tactics could be a main one.Robert632 said:I think part of it was fear tactics. Think about it. There are already bullets flying everywhere and artillery going off, but now some guy is running about lighting people on fire.That just scares the shit out of me.
Some flame throwers even throw flaming tar at you. So not only are the flames burning away at your body, but there's a layer of intensely heated liquid all over you. Your eyes will literally explode from your sockets, and your scalp will burn off from your head as you simultaneously suffocate from the loss of oxygen.
And imagine hearing that on the battle-field. Hearing your fellow soldiers cry out as they suffer probably one of the most painful deaths imaginable.
This is why I never use any fire oriented weapons in video games. I fear I would cause the NPCs too much pain.